338  Massee: The Modern Tendency of Mycological Study. 
embodies two distinct species characterised entirely by micro- 
scopic features. The presence or absence of cystidia, form of 
basidia, also the number of sterigmata they bear are also 
microscopic features of systematic value in the same group of 
fungi. 
From a broad point of view modern research has not very 
materially affected species, in most instances the additional 
microscopic characters going to confirm the opinion of old 
goaniirs especially i in the Basidiomycetes, which received most 
attention at their hands. This statement, which is true of 
aide of species, points to a condition of things which is 
much to be deplored, namely, the comparative neglect of naked- 
eye characters by members of the new school, who frequently 
boast that a mere fragment examined ina tg is sufficient 
for the determination of a species. may in many instances 
be true, but evidence is by no means cose to prove that such 
determinations have frequently resulted in disaster. Perhaps 
nowhere in the vegetable kingdom are species more clearly 
defined than in the Agaricinez, or even in the fungi as a whole, 
but as in other groups of organisms there is no royal road to 
this knowledge, which can only be acquired by long-continued 
macroscopic and microscopic observation. As a rule morpho- 
logists and biologists lack this power, sometimes even essaying 
to scorn it, nrg the material they investigate is usually 
considered as new to science, and inadequately described, or i 
old soidion is too frequently incorrectly determined, as 
indicated by such names as Pesisa Wilkommii, 2 vametes 
radiciperda, etc. 
When morphologists and systematists are more in touch ait 
sympathy with each other there will be less literature, but what 
is written will be of more value, as everyone then will be certain 
as to, the exact species discussed, which unfortunately is by no 
means the case at the present day. 
As already stated, species are not disturbed to any extent by 
morphological investigations, but when we come to the affinities 
of species and groups, everything i is topsy-turvy, compared with 
old arrangements, which in many instances have little more 
than antiquity and prejudice as théir sheet-anchor. On the other 
hand, the latest schemes of affinity can only be considered as 
tentative, numerous brilliant modern discoveries from repeated 
confirmation must be accepted as facts of great importance ; the 
interpretation of these facts is as yet mostly a personal opinion, 
which will undoubtedly be modified from time to time as our 
knowledge increases. On one point, however, all are agreed— 
that no natural scheme of classification can possibly be formu- 
Naturalist, 
